CLEVELAND+BD.+OF+EDUC.+V.+LOUDERMILL

Cleveland BOE v.   Loudermill U.S. Supreme Court Argued December 3, 1984 Decided March 19, 1985 __ Background __ Mr. Loudermill was hired by the Cleveland Board of Education as a security guard sometime prior to December 1984. On his application, he stated that he had never been convicted of a felony when in fact he had been found guilty of grand larceny. The Board dismissed him for lying without giving him a hearing of any kind, a violation of state law. In Ohio, “classified civil servants” must be allowed an administrative review before termination can take place. He filed a claim with the Civil Service Commission, but they upheld the Board’s decision. He could have filed for an appeal, but instead took the case to the Federal District Court on the basis that a chance to counter charges against terminated employees was not made available. The Court responded with a dismissal because when he was given an opportunity in court to dispute the charges, he had no claim.

Sometime before the District Court made its decision, the Cleveland BOE let Mr. Donnelly go from his job as a bus mechanic for failing his eye exam. He filed a claim with the Civil Service Commission and was reinstated, but would not grant retroactive pay. He took his case to the Federal District Court as well, but it was dismissed for the same reason as Loudermill’s case. The two employees joined forces in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

__ Decision and Rationale __ The Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s decision because whether either individual had a reply for charges was not the point. They should have been afforded the opportunity to do so before termination took place to ensure that it was justified. Also, by law, they should be given a hearing after termination. Another point made was that property interests and liberties are not bestowed upon us by legislation, but by the Constitution. The courts cannot authorize the denial of those interests or liberties without adhering to proper procedures.

__ Implications __ Due process is must be followed so that all involved know that the basis for action is valid and is sufficient for termination. Proper procedures guarantee the rights of the individual and protect employers from liability.

__ Quiz Question __ The principle that the government must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person according to the law is called __due__ __process__.  Reviewed independently by Eileen Boyd


 * Cleveland BOE**
 * v.**
 * Loudermill**
 * U.S. Supreme Court**
 * Argued December 3, 1984**
 * Decided March 19, 1985**


 * Background**
 * Two employees of the Cleveland Board of Education filed suit claiming that they were not given a chance to defend theirselves or respond to charges or grounds for dismissal. First person was James Loudermill a security guard that did not tell about a felony conviction for grand larceny, then there was a bus mechanic Richard Donnelly who was dismissed because he failed an eye exam. Loudermill believed that the Ohio statute providing for administrative review was unconstitutional because it did not allow him a chance to respond to the charges or grounds for dismissal. Loudermill also claimed that he was not given a quick dismissal hearing. The courts dismissed both cases in Loudermill cases the reasoning behind it was that in employment he had a vested interest and there were procedures that had to be followed, also there were procedures for dismissal because of the procedures in place there for allowing all of the due process. In Richard Donnelly's case they used the premise of Loudermill case for the reasoning and decision.**
 * Implications:**
 * It is important as an employee to know your legal rights, know the procedures for dismissal and your appeal process. It is also imperative that people follow the guidleines and procedures in the event of dismissal to allow the due process procedure to take place to ensure the validity of the grounds for dismissal and or the charges against the employee.**
 * Question:**
 * T/F**
 * An employee does not have the right to a post termination hearing.**
 * Kari Graves**